Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 13:47:20 -0400 From: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r241373 - head/lib/libc/stdlib Message-ID: <CAF6rxgkDbyrCHfY-5eMjJ%2B7nP9ZCnXsjLgEBB1Q_p=QJ3tCkfg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <507451DE.9060909@freebsd.org> References: <201210091425.q99EPFS6020787@svn.freebsd.org> <507451DE.9060909@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9 October 2012 12:33, Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org> wrote: > Do you check assembler output for _both_ cases? Yes. > In my testing clang and gcc xor's 'junk' properly in case it have > 'volatile' keyword (as in srandomdev()) and elide it without 'volatile'. volatile is still undefined: see 5.1.2.2.3 and 6.7.2.4 of ISO9899 > IMHO this change should be backed out for srandomdev() and adding > 'volatile' for sranddev() instead. http://blog.eitanadler.com/2012/10/reduced-entropy-in-rand-and-random.html for additional details and actual assembler output. -- Eitan Adler Source & Ports committer X11, Bugbusting teams
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgkDbyrCHfY-5eMjJ%2B7nP9ZCnXsjLgEBB1Q_p=QJ3tCkfg>